Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Will confusion cause Prop. 8 problems?

Prop8 Speaking out recently against Proposition 8, the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown made an appeal for the importance of protecting the rights of same-sex couples.

And then he urged his audience to vote yes on the proposition. Brown misspoke. He intended to advocate a no vote. But he isn’t alone in confusing which side is which. As election day nears, both supporters and opponents of Proposition 8 worry that voters will be confused by a choice that can seem counterintuitive: Voting no on the initiative means voting yes on gay marriage, while voting yes means gay marriage would be disallowed.

“There is confusion on both sides over yes meaning no and no meaning yes,” said West Hollywood City Councilman John Duran, who is helping campaign for No on 8. He added, jokingly, that he has heard supporters of the proposition say, “I’m opposed to gay marriage, so I’m voting no, and I’m like, ‘Yes, vote no.’”

In recent days, both campaigns have taken steps to educate their faithful to make sure they vote the right way.

Read the rest of the story here.

--Jessica Garrison

More to the story: Jessica writes about how gay married couples would face legal limbo if Prop. 8 passes. Times gay marraige map.

Photo: David McNew / Getty Images

Comments () | Archives (4)

I really hope there aren't problems or confusion over what a yes v. a no vote means. I sincerelly want to see how CA voters truly wiegh in on this issue.

I am personally voting yes. To me, the most compelling reason is the research panal conducted on the issue in france. In a society with overwhelming secular values -- after conducting a full scale inquiry and researching other nations who had implemented gay marriage -- they decided not to impliment gay marriage in thier country -- they decided this because even though homosexuals are a vulnerable population, they felt that children were a more vulnerable population at that public policy should be centered around what is best for children as opposed to adults. Wow, they felt thier society should foster the ideal of children having a mother and a father.

Civil Unions are still legal there but gay marriage isn't. That is the outcome I would hope for in our state and ultimately in our country too so I'm voting YES on 8 but I respect the opposing view and hope votes are caste as each voter intends.


Voting "NO" on Prop 8 means voting in favor of same sex marriage.

Voting "YES" means voting in favor of "only marriage between one man and one woman will be recognized in California".

I won't be confused when I place my vote for YES on Prop 8. It's not about bigotry, discrimination, civil rights, nor hatred. It's all about preserving the traditional definition of marriage, the only definition that makes sense from a biological, sociological, and historical viewpoint: "only marriage between a man and a woman will be recognized in California".



I think if enough people agree, we can solve a big misunderstanding between the gay community and the prop 8 proponents....So when you get a chance, please read the article.

How the California Supreme Court's Proposition 8 Ruling Can Vindicate Both Equality and Religious Freedom: Part Two in a Two-.

The reason why I thought this article was good is as follows: Making policy and laws need to be separate from the beliefs of individuals. Obviously, because each individual has a right to their own belief and because those beliefs are so varied, no one should force their beliefs on another. I believe there is a problem when the government makes laws using a word with religious significance and decides to use that word in a non-religious context. What happens --and I believe it will eventually happen---is that policy and law can be used to inadvertently force beliefs on others for whom the word has a religious significance. Most couples are just 2 human beings who want to be together and be recognized in the eyes of the law. Whether or not you want to use the word "marriage" is fine in everyday language but the written law code needs to have more precise wording. The law needs words that do not come from any specific religion with specific historical and modern-day significance. Lawsuits depend on the interpretation of words thus the law should be free of religious words which have different meanings for different people.


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


About L.A. Now
L.A. Now is the Los Angeles Times’ breaking news section for Southern California. It is produced by more than 80 reporters and editors in The Times’ Metro section, reporting from the paper’s downtown Los Angeles headquarters as well as bureaus in Costa Mesa, Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, Ventura and West Los Angeles.
Have a story tip for L.A. Now?
Please send to newstips@latimes.com
Can I call someone with news?
Yes. The city desk number is (213) 237-7847.


Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: